AUDIT REPORT 

Audit of NRC’s Accounting and Control 

Over Time and Labor Reporting 

OIG-08-A-11 June 17, 2008 

All publicly available OIG reports (including this report) are accessible through 

NRC’s Web site at: 

http:/www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/insp-gen/ 
UNITED STATES 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 

OFFICE OF THE 

INSPECTOR GENERAL 

 June 17, 2008 

MEMORANDUM TO: R. William Borchardt 

 Executive Director for Operations 

 James E. Dyer 

 Chief Financial Officer 

FROM: Stephen D. Dingbaum /RA/ 

 Assistant Inspector General for Audits 

SUBJECT: AUDIT OF NRC’S ACCOUNTING AND CONTROL OVER 

TIME AND LABOR REPORTING (OIG-08-A-11) 

Attached is the Office of the Inspector General’s (OIG) audit report, Audit of NRC’s 

Accounting and Control Over Time and Labor Reporting. 

This report presents the results of the subject audit performed by Leonard G. Birnbaum 

and Company, under contract to the NRC Office of the Inspector General. Agency 

comments provided at the exit conference on April 28, 2008, have been incorporated, 

as appropriate, into this report. 

Please provide information on actions taken or planned on each of the 

recommendations within 30 days of the date of this memorandum. Actions taken or 

planned are subject to OIG follow up as stated in Management Directive 6.1. 

We appreciate the cooperation extended to us by members of your staff during the 

audit. If you have any questions or comments about our report, please contact me at 

415-5915 or Steven Zane, Team Leader, Financial and Administrative Audit Team, at 

415-5912. 

Attachment: As stated 
Electronic Distribution

Frank P. Gillespie, Executive Director, Advisory Committee on Reactor 

 Safeguards/Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste 

E. Roy Hawkens, Chief Administrative Judge, Atomic Safety and 

 Licensing Board Panel 

Karen D. Cyr, General Counsel 

John F. Cordes, Jr., Director, Office of Commission Appellate Adjudication 

Margaret M. Doane, Director, Office of International Programs 

Rebecca L. Schmidt, Director, Office of Congressional Affairs 

Eliot B. Brenner, Director, Office of Public Affairs 

Annette Vietti-Cook, Secretary of the Commission 

Bruce S. Mallett, Deputy Executive Director for Reactor 

 and Preparedness Programs, OEDO 

Martin J. Virgilio, Deputy Executive Director for Materials, Waste, Research, 

 State, Tribal, and Compliance Programs, OEDO 

Darren B. Ash, Deputy Executive Director for Information Services 

 and Chief Information Officer, OEDO 

Vonna L. Ordaz, Assistant for Operations, OEDO 

Timothy F. Hagan, Director, Office of Administration 

Cynthia A. Carpenter, Director, Office of Enforcement 

Charles L. Miller, Director, Office of Federal and State Materials 

 and Environmental Management Programs 

Guy P. Caputo, Director, Office of Investigations 

Thomas M. Boyce, Director, Office of Information Services 

James F. McDermott, Director, Office of Human Resources 

Michael R. Johnson, Director, Office of New Reactors 

Michael F. Weber, Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards 

Eric J.Leeds, Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 

Brian W. Sheron, Director, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 

Corenthis B. Kelley, Director, Office of Small Business and Civil Rights 

Roy P. Zimmerman, Director, Office of Nuclear Security and Incident Response 

Samuel J. Collins, Regional Administrator, Region I 

Luis A. Reyes, Regional Administrator, Region II 

James L. Caldwell, Regional Administrator, Region III 

Elmo E. Collins, Jr., Regional Administrator, Region IV 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

Office of the Inspector General 

Office of Audits 

Independent Accountant’s Report 

On the Application of Agreed-Upon Procedures 

On the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s 

Time and Labor System 

Contract No.: SAQMPD040033 

Order No. : DR-36-07-346 

Report Date: May 8, 2008 
TABLE OF CONTENTS

DESCRIPTION PAGE

Executive Summary 1 

 

Abbreviations and Acronyms 3 

Independent Accountant’s Report 4 

• Background 4 

• Purpose & Scope 4 

• Findings 5 

• Consolidated List of Recommendations 11 

• Methodology 12 

• Agency Comments 14 
1 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Under contract to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), Office of the Inspector General 

(OIG), Leonard G. Birnbaum and Company (LGB), LLP, performed certain agreed-upon 

procedures on NRC’s Time and Labor (T&L) system. The objectives of this audit were to 

determine whether: 

• NRC has established and implemented internal controls over time and labor reporting 

to provide reasonable assurance that hours worked in pay status and hours absent are 

properly reported, and 

• The time and labor system can be easier and more efficient to use. 

The effort required testing internal controls at three offices: NRC Headquarters in Rockville, 

Maryland; Region III in Lisle, Illinois; and Region IV in Arlington, Texas. 

The review also encompassed (1) the form and structure of agency bills to licensees including 

obtaining industry views regarding the level of detail needed for billing, and (2) the usefulness of 

agency management reports considering the significant number of existing Technical 

Assignment Control (TAC) codes in the T&L system. 

The results of the audit were as follows: 

Basic Internal Controls:

Identified internal controls were adequate for security, recordation 

and reporting purposes. 

 

Number of T&L Assignments:

Despite recent management initiatives that resulted in reducing the 

number of open assignments, the total universe of open T&L 

assignments (TACs and Inspection Report [IRs] assignments) is 

now greater than the number at the start of this review. At the 

outset of the audit engagement it was estimated that there were 

approximately 10,000 open T&L assignments. As of January 28, 

2008, there were 19,712 open assignments identified in the system 

database. By March 21, 2008, there were 20,041 open assignments 

in the system database. The primary driver for the increased 

number of TACs is related to project management and has nothing 

to do with T&L or licensee billing. 
2 

Parallel Automated and Paper Documentation in the T&L System:

We found that despite the controls embodied in the automated 

T&L recording process, redundant hard copies of T&L documents 

are retained to support and document employee time charges. 

Retention Requirements for T&L Forms: 

T&L supporting paper documentation, which is rarely examined 

after the first year (12 months) of its creation, is retained for an 

unnecessarily long (six years and three months) period of time. 

Form and Structure of Agency Bills to Licensees and Industry Views:

We found that the interface of the T&L system with the Fee Billing 

System is operating in accordance with prescribed policies and 

procedures. Assessments by industry representatives as to the 

appropriateness and usefulness of the structure and level of detail 

currently included in invoices from NRC were generally mixed. 

While some comments were positive and complimentary, others 

expressed discontent and requests for improvements. 

Management Reporting:

We found that there is ample reporting on the status of interim and 

final processing of employee time charges, and on the status of 

payroll processing. Further, there are a variety of project 

management reports on the status of work assignments and 

performance indicators on specific NRC programs. 

What is lacking, however, is feedback to upper management on a 

regular basis as to the level of on-going open assignment activity 

(TACs and IRs) in the T&L System itself at regular reporting 

intervals. 

Recommendations 

This report makes six recommendations. A Consolidated List of Recommendations 

appears on page 11 of this report. 

Agency Comments 

At an exit conference held on April 28, 2008, agency managers provided comments 

concerning the draft report. We modified this report in response to their comments, as 

we deemed appropriate. 
3 

Abbreviations and Acronyms

AUP Agreed-Upon Procedures 

EPM Enterprise Project Management (subsystem) 

IP Inspection Procedures 

IR Inspection Report 

LFT License Fee Team 

LGB Leonard G. Birnbaum and Company, LLP 

NARA National Archives and Records Administration 

NEI Nuclear Energy Institute 

NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

NRO Office of New Reactors 

NRR Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 

OIG Office of the Inspector General 

RITS Regulatory Information Tracking System 

RPS Reactor Program System 

SAR Summary Approval Report 

T&L Time and Labor 

TAC Technical Assignment Control 

TRIM Time, Resource and Inventory Management (subsystem)
4 

Independent Accountant’s Report

on the Application of Agreed-Upon Procedures

on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s

Time and Labor System

Background 

Salaries and benefits for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC’s) approximately 

3,500 employees account for about 60 percent of NRC’s annual obligations. Approximately 90 

percent of the salaries and benefits are recovered through billings to NRC licensees. 

NRC’s Time and Labor (T&L) system is intended to adequately support employees’ pay and 

show the number of hours employees are either working or are in leave status. The system 

provides data in support of entitlements to overtime pay, premium pay, and compensatory time 

earned and used. An accurate and reliable system of collecting T&L data is necessary to 

provide a basis for (1) allocating employees’ time to the agency’s program and performance 

objectives, (2) assessing NRC fees, and (3) financial reporting. 

Purpose and Scope 

Under contract to NRC, Office of the Inspector General (OIG), Leonard G. Birnbaum and 

Company (LGB), LLP, performed agreed-upon procedures to review NRC’s T&L System. The 

objectives of this audit are to determine whether: 

• NRC has established and implemented internal controls over time and labor reporting 

to provide reasonable assurance that hours worked in pay status and hours absent are 

properly reported, and 

• The time and labor system can be easier and more efficient to use. 

These objectives included performing an analysis of the number of and process for establishing 

Technical Assignment Control (TAC) codes. This agreed-upon procedures engagement was 

conducted in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of 

America and Government Auditing Standards issued by the Comptroller General of the United 

States. These standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, 

appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our 

audit objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our 

findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. The sufficiency of these procedures is 

solely the responsibility of NRC OIG. Consequently, we make no representation regarding the 

sufficiency of the procedures described below either for the purpose for which this report has 

been requested or for any other purpose. 
5 

Findings 

A. Basic Controls

We found that appropriate T&L system internal controls have been established for each of 

the basic functions related to labor recording: recording, approving, and processing time and 

attendance data and preparing management reports. Tests at NRC operating units 

determined that the identified established controls were, in fact, in place and implemented at 

operating levels. We consider the identified controls to be adequate for security, recordation 

and reporting purposes. Analysis of the risk of error in routine processing of time and 

attendance data elicited the conclusion that such risk is low. 

While we consider the existing controls to be effective, greater consistency in time reporting 

could be achieved by issuing guidance covering activities for which there is no articulated 

policy, such as time charging while in a travel status. 

B. Number of Assignments (TACs and Inspection Reports [IRs])

At the start of this engagement, it was estimated that there were over 10,000 open TAC/IR 

assignments in the T&L system. The determination of the cause(s) of this volume, together 

with suggestions for process improvements, was cited as one of the primary goals for this 

engagement. Recently, NRC management initiatives, including guidance issued on 

January 14, 2008, made a concerted effort to address these imbalances, with some apparent 

success. For example, a recent Office of the Chief Financial Officer report showed that the 

number of TACs and IRs with less than 8 recorded hours had been reduced by 3,681 

assignments between June and October 2007. Currently, however, the total number of 

TACs and IRs is greater than the number at the beginning of the engagement. At the outset 

of the audit engagement it was estimated that there were approximately 10,000 open T&L 

assignments. As of January 28, 2008, there were 19,712 open assignments identified in the 

system database. By March 21, 2008, there were 20,041 open assignments in the system 

database. 

The current array of assignments by NRC organization shows a large concentration of 

assignments in two organizations, (1) Office of New Reactors (NRO) and (2) Office of 

Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR). 

The principal drivers for the establishment of new assignments are the detail tracking 

requirements of Project Management subsystems used in the “Regulatory Information 

Tracking System” (RITS) and the “Reactor Program System” (RPS). Subsystems used in 

NRC offices regarded as “RITS Offices” include the “RITS Technical Assignment Control” 

(TAC); RPS Inspection Planning (IP), “Time, Resource and Inventory Management” 

(TRIM); and “Enterprise Project Management” (EPM). Such subsystems tend to initially 

input assignments into the T&L system on the basis of Project Management, Budgeting, 

Performance Measurement, Billing and other management objectives for subsequent 
6 

tracking purposes. The prescribed categories of time charge collection tend to be at a 

“Task” or “Procedure” assignment identification. Quite often, these are at relatively low 

incremental levels of effort. 

There have been numerous prior reports, reviews and studies made which included 

assessments of the T&A System. Among these were: 

9 Financial Statement Audit Reports (R. Navarro & Associates) 

9 NRC Performance and Accountability Reports1

 

9 OMB Circular A-123 Assessments2

9 OIG Reports3

9 Business Improvement Project Studies 

9 Various NRC management reviews and related directives 

All of these expressed concern over the significant number of assignments established, the 

number of assignments with no activity for long periods, the number of assignments with 

low hourly postings (8 hours or less), etc. 

Recommendations: 

We recommend that the Chief Financial Officer: 

1. Establish high topical level assignment codes in the T&L system. 

We recommend that the Chief Financial Officer and the Executive Director for Operations: 

2. Develop and implement other types of recordation vehicles, outside of the T&L system, 

to track specific Project Management and Performance objectives, as warranted. 

C. Redundant Automated and Hard Copy Controls

There is a significant paper trail in place in the T&L operating procedures, in addition to the 

requirements of the automated T&L system, to support and document time charges. It was 

generally felt by all interviewees during our review that the paper flow should be curtailed if 

electronic means are otherwise available. 

 

1

 The auditor’s report contained in the 2006 Performance and Accountability Report identified material weaknesses 

in the fee billing process, noting that quality assurance procedures do not address the completeness of TAC controls 

as compared with TACs available to be billed or simply those that were billable in the previous billing cycle. The 

auditor’s report also cited significant underbillings (approximately $750,000). 2

 The FY 2006 OMB Circular A-123 assessment observed “...large number of prior period time and labor 

adjustments indicate that bi-weekly time sheet certification may not be effective...”, and “...errors in T&L reporting 

have the potential to impact the Fee Revenue Financial Statement.” 

3

 OIG report OIG-05-A-11, April 13, 2005, noted, “While the implementation of RPS has allowed for a single 

system for entering inspection information, the information is not well protected, is not complete, and is not fully 

accurate.” 
7 

In the review of the T&L system design and processes, we found that the automated portions 

of the system incorporate the following types of controls: 

• Employee Approved Access 

• Personal Identification Codes 

• Personal Passwords 

• Designations of Officials’ Positions 

• Establishment of Work Schedules 

• Review of Time Charges for Proper Leave and Administrative Codes 

• Summary Approval Processing 

• Edit/Error Runs and Routines 

Similarly, the paper portions of the T&L system require the following documentation: 

• Hours of Work Request 

• Credit Hour Plans and Certification 

• Requests for Leave or Approved Absence 

• Requests for Authorization for Irregular or Occasional Overtime or 

Compensatory Time 

• Review of documentation (e.g., jury notice, doctor’s letter), as 

required, supporting leave charges 

• Original Signatures of Employee and Approving Official on Summary 

Approval Report (SAR) 

Several NRC staff interviewed during our review made the following point: If an employee 

is cleared for security access into the T&L System, has a Personal Identification Code, and 

has been issued a system password for data entry and review, then many of the required 

paper forms to support time charges that have been otherwise been entered into an 

automated system seem duplicative. 

Further, in many cases it is very difficult to get hardcopy employee signatures and other 

required documentation on a timely basis under the current system requirements. This is 

especially true in the case of employees working at sites remote from the timekeeper and 

approving officials (e.g., Resident Inspectors). These individuals have to send timesheet and 

other supporting documents by facsimile to the Unit timekeeper in advance in order to meet 

the pay period due date requirements. Use of electronic signature capabilities may be 

sufficient for certification and approval. 

The cause of this condition seems to be a perpetuation of the use of “NRC Forms,” which 

may have been practical at one time, but could have been superseded with the introduction 

of specific automated controls in the system. There likely has not been a recent evaluation 

of the need for such paper requirements. We were advised that the Office of the Chief 

Financial Officer is currently evaluating the use of electronic signatures. 
8 

Timekeepers, in general, spend an inordinate amount of time copying, mailing, filing, 

storing, shredding, etc., for a T&L system that is supposed to be fully automated, with builtin internal controls. 

The operational effect on unit staff employees and approving officials is similarly 

burdensome. Frequently, facsimile copies and mailings of paper support documents 

consumes the time of employees who could otherwise be productively engaged in 

performing billable work projects. We did not attempt to quantify the monetary impact of 

such efforts. However, with NRC employee population of about 3,500, some of whom are 

in remote locations, the dollar impact could be significant. 

Recommendations:

We recommend that the Chief Financial Officer: 

3. Conduct a detailed system analysis and eliminate redundant paper forms that are not 

needed. 

4. Use electronic signatures for time reporting and approval. 

D. Document Retention Requirements 

With respect to retention requirements, the amount of required paper (e.g., several pages), 

per employee, per unit, per pay period (26 pay periods/year), for 6 years and 3 months 

becomes very burdensome at the operating level. Beyond the first year of retention, it is 

doubtful that such paper support is ever examined further. 

As with the case of the basic requirements for the paper forms themselves, we believe that 

the retention requirements are simply a perpetuation of the initial time frames established by 

NRC when the requirements were first imposed. Most of the required forms reviewed in the 

system are self-imposed, internal NRC forms. 

Based on published budgetary data, NRC employs in excess of 3,500 employees. All 

employees’ time charges are incorporated into the T&L system for processing. 

Conservatively, if only 3 to 5 pages of NRC forms are required to be retained per employee, 

this means that 10,500 to 17,500 pieces of paper are being saved and filed each pay period. 

Extending that by 26 pay periods in a year, the annual total is between 273,000 to 455,000 

pieces of paper per year. While the full retention period for forms is 6 years and 3 months, 

most organizations keep files for 7 years. If those amounts are extrapolated to the full 

retention period, it would indicate that there could be as much as 1,911,000 to 3,185,000 

pieces of paper being stored or otherwise warehoused by NRC on a continuing basis. 

While the General Records Schedules issued by the National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA) require retention of records until the earlier of six years or audit by 

the Government Accountability Office, NARA, under the authority of 44U.S.C. §3303(2), 
9 

may permit disposal of records not needed in the transaction of current business and that do 

not appear to have sufficient administrative, legal, research, or other value to warrant their 

further preservation by the Government. 

Recommendation:

We recommend that the Chief Financial Officer: 

5. Coordinate with the National Archives and Records Administration to shorten record 

retention requirements for T&L records. 

E. Billing Detail and Industry Views 

Generally, billings to clients are made on a quarterly basis. A quarterly billing run is made 

and reports run for final certification. Data files are downloaded (same as reports). Invoices 

are processed to clients as indicated from the runs. The T&L data by this point have been 

consolidated to accommodate line item billing in some summary fashion, by client. The 

minute detail of incremental time recording (1⁄4 hour, 1⁄2 hour, 3⁄4 hour, etc., increments) tends 

to be hidden in the summaries. Billing detail, however, will reflect the line items of 

established TACs. 

The principal drivers for the detail billing elements (by TAC) in invoices to customers are the 

previously discussed tracking requirements of project management subsystems used in the 

Regulatory Information Tracking System (RITS) and the Reactor Program System (RPS), and 

their related management subsystems.

LGB asked the License Fee Team (LFT) group if the level of detail being captured at these 

incremental levels was critical for billing purposes. We were informed that in some cases, 

the level of detail being billed may require an invoice of 10 or more pages. The overall 

response of the group was that they need the total of the effort charged to be reflected in the 

billings, but that it was not necessary for them to have minute details if they are summarized 

accurately and in their entirety. 

LGB also solicited industry views regarding the general form and structure of NRC bills, 

with particular interest in the level of detail needed for payment review and approvals. The 

industry responses were somewhat mixed. 

Summary results from materials licensees indicated general satisfaction with the (1) level of 

detail provided in NRC bills and (2) additional support provided by the License Fee Team, 

when needed. Further improvement was desired by the Materials Licensees in the areas of 

(1) timing of the billings – i.e., reducing the lag time between the date the service is 

performed and the date the bill issued, and (2) consistency in the charging of apparently 

similar services. 
10 

Responses from individual reactor licensees tended to fall generally in the middle of the 

identified satisfaction ranges, by category. Narrative comments received from these reactor 

licensee representatives indicated various areas where NRC could address possible 

improvement revisions. 

Our review in this area was necessarily limited in scope. As indicated, the results of our 

review in this area showed that the preliminary impact on customer satisfaction is mixed. 

The respondents were generally complimentary on the support given by the License Fee 

Team to assist them in resolving billing questions or open issues. 

F. Management Reporting 

We found that there is ample reporting on the interim and final processing of the status of 

employee time charging, and on the status of payroll processing. Further, there are a variety 

of project management type reports on the status of work assignments and performance 

indicators on specific NRC programs. 

What is lacking, however, is feedback to upper management on a regular basis as to the 

level of on-going assignment activity in the T&L system itself at regular reporting intervals. 

In other words, we found no recurring reporting that would advise management on the total 

number of TACs and IRs open in the system at specific points in time (e.g., monthly, 

quarterly, semi-annually, etc.). Based on interviews held during the engagement, there has 

never been a formal, recurring, status report provided to upper management on the number 

of open work assignments as part of the normal T&L system outputs. Such information 

appears to be available to upper management by specific request only. Since the number of 

open assignments has been the focus of a good deal of management attention in the past, it is 

our opinion that such information should be a normal part of the management reporting 

structure. 

We believe the basic cause of this condition is that such reporting requirements on the status 

of open assignments has never been mandated, formalized and incorporated into the T&L 

system outputs. Inquiries on the status of open assignments at points in time have 

previously been made largely on an ad hoc basis. 

The obvious effect, as has been discussed in other sections of this report, is that numerous 

prior reports, reviews and studies had to be made on an ad hoc basis to address the 

possibility that the quantity of open work assignments in the T&L System has become 

excessive. 

Recommendation:

We recommend that the Chief Financial Officer: 

6. Develop a formal report on the number of open work assignments incorporated in the 

T&L System and issue the report at regular intervals. 
11 

Consolidated List of Recommendations 

We recommend that the Chief Financial Officer: 

1. Establish high topical level assignment codes in the T&L system. 

We recommend that the Chief Financial Officer and the Executive Director for Operations: 

2. Develop and implement other types of recordation vehicles, outside of the T&L system, 

to track specific Project Management and Performance objectives, as warranted. 

We recommend that the Chief Financial Officer: 

3. Conduct a detailed system analysis and eliminate redundant paper forms that are not 

needed. 

4. Use electronic signatures for time reporting and approval. 

5. Coordinate with the National Archives and Records Administration to shorten retention 

requirements for T&L records. 

6. Develop a formal report on the number of open work assignments incorporated in the 

T&L System and issue the report at regular intervals. 
12 

Methodology 

The procedures we performed are as follows: 

• Reviewed the internal controls over NRC’s T&L system to identify any 

cost effective opportunities for process improvements (including any 

opportunities to prevent/detect fraud or abuse). All aspects of the T&L 

system were reviewed, including: 

3⁄4 Recording time 

3⁄4 Approving 

3⁄4 Processing 

3⁄4 Preparing management reports 

• Reviewed and tested the application of internal controls at the following 

NRC offices: the Office of New Reactors and the Office of Nuclear 

Reactor Regulation in Rockville, Maryland; NRC Region III in Lisle, 

Illinois; and NRC Region IV in Arlington, Texas. This review and testing 

included determining that (a) hours charged to overtime and the various 

types of compensatory time are recorded and approved in a consistent 

manner and in accordance with agency policy, and (b) controls over 

various types of work schedules (e.g. telecommuting) are sound and 

operating effectively. 

• Determined whether (and where) opportunities exist to make the T&L 

system easier and more efficient to use, particularly in light of the number 

of open Technical Assignment Control (TACs) codes. This aspect 

included review of the process for establishing TACs. 

• Examined the operating policies and procedures of the T&L System as 

they relate to automated versus hard copy controls. 

• Assessed the appropriateness of T&L record retention policies. 

• Reviewed the form and structure of NRC bills to licensees to determine 

the extent and level of depth of labor reporting that is considered required 

for program and performance reporting and related billings to licensees. 

In the performance of this procedure, we conducted the following 

activities: 

3⁄4 Held meetings with the members of NRC License Fee Team in 

Rockville, Maryland. 

3⁄4 Obtained explanations on the interface of the T&L system with the 

Fee Billing System. 
13 

3⁄4 Obtained an overview of the process via walk-through illustrations 

of the billing procedures, including the ultimate capturing of the 

labor effort into the billing system and final processing of invoices. 

3⁄4 Solicited industry views on their satisfaction with the form and 

structure of agency bills, including the level of reporting detail 

provided. 

• Reviewed the usefulness of agency management reports as currently 

structured taking into consideration the number of existing TACs. 

In the performance of this procedure, we traced the process steps made for 

recording, approving, and processing time in the T&L system. We also 

identified and reviewed the management reporting vehicles at each phase 

of the process.